Try asking the following...
Try asking the following...
March 21, 1972
COURT OF APPEAL
CORAM
JUDGMENT OF JIAGGE J.A.
Jiagge J.A. delivered the judgment of the court. This appeal is brought in order to challenge the validity of the ruling of the High Court, Accra, referring a cause before it to a referee without the consent of the parties.
The respondent by his specially endorsed writ instituted an action against the appellant claiming the sum of ¢2,825.20 together with interest as money paid for a consideration that had failed.
[p.80]
The court after hearing the evidence of the parties held: "At this stage, it being palpably clear that the matter is a question of adjustment of accounts, I do hereby refer the case to a referee, Mr. Brew, Senior High Court Registrar, for him to go into the accounts and submit his report to the court . . ."
The report of the referee was in due course submitted to the court. The respondent under Order 36, r. 34 of the Supreme [High] Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1954 (L.N. 140A), moved the court to adopt and carry into effect the report of the referee.
At the hearing of the motion counsel for the appellant raised a preliminary objection that the motion was irregular because it failed to comply with Order 36, r. 32 which states:
"Whenever a report shall be made by a referee, he shall on the same day cause notice thereof to be given to all the parties to the trial or the reference before him by prepaid post letter directed to the address for service of each party, who shall in due course of post be deemed to have notice of such report."
This objection was overruled by the court on the ground that each party had in fact received a copy of the referee's report; a date was fixed for hearing and on that day counsel on either side was heard in argument on the motion. The court in its ruling carefully considered the referee's report in its entirety and gave judgment for the respondent for the sum of ¢3,407.20 together with interest calculated at five per cent per annum.
The proceedings in the court below were conducted on the basis that the order referring the case to the referee was a valid one and not once was there any suggestion that the order was irregular and of no effect. The only ground of appeal argued before us was:
"The reference by the learned trial judge of the case to a referee was null, void, invalid and of no effect, since the law of Ghana makes no provision for the exercise of judicial power by referees. The proceedings before the referee were therefore irregular and of no effect, and the judgm
AI Generated Summary
The Court of Appeal, per Jiagge J.A. delivering the judgment of the court, dismissed an appeal challenging a High Court, Accra ruling that referred a dispute to a referee without the parties’ consent. The respondent had sued to recover ¢2,825.20 plus interest as money paid for a consideration that failed. After evidence, the High Court determined the case was an accounting matter and referred it to Mr. Brew, Senior High Court Registrar, who reported back. The respondent moved under Order 36 rule 34 to adopt the report; the appellant objected under Order 36 rule 32’s notice requirement, which was overruled. On appeal, the appellant argued Ghana law provided no authority for referees, rendering the referral and resulting judgment invalid. The court traced the legal framework—Courts Ordinance s.15 conferring English High Court powers, and Order 33 rr.10–11 authorizing referrals—saved by the Courts Act 1960 and Courts Decree 1966, and held the referral valid, affirming judgment and awarding costs of ¢112.50.